Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Crooked (film)


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was   keep. Incubation should be considered. – Juliancolton  &#124; Talk 00:08, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Crooked (film)

 * – ( View AfD View log  •  )

Notability? Sources seem like nothing more than gossip websites. In addition, according to WP:NFF, the production stage of this film, according to Imdb, is unknown. Mrmewe (talk) 05:46, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Film-related deletion discussions.  -- • Gene93k (talk) 19:02, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep or Incubate without prejudice toward recreation. WP:CRYSTAL instructs " All articles about anticipated events must be verifiable, and the subject matter must be of sufficiently wide interest that it would merit an article if the event had already occurred. It is appropriate to report discussion and arguments about the prospects for success of future proposals and projects or whether some development will occur, if discussion is properly referenced." In searching "Crooked, Abhinay Deo" and "Crooked, Bachchan, Rai", I find enough speaking of the film's production so as to allow consideration for inclusion per the WP:GNG... including One India 1, The Hindu, One India 2, Search Andhra, ThaiIndian News, Real Bollywood 1, India.com, BollywoodHungama, Bollywood Mantra 1, Filmicafe 1, Real Bollywood 2, Bollywood Mantra 2, Filmicafe 2 and a number of others.  Seems that per WP:POTENTIAL and WP:ATD there is plenty available to turn the current stub into a nice article for the project.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 21:41, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep: Per Schmidt. Joe Chill (talk) 21:44, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of India-related deletion discussions.  -- - Spaceman  Spiff  23:32, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment the name Crooked as actually the production title and is set to be changed prior to release. I'm not familiar with the exact policy relating to movies, but if you don't know the name of an upcoming album, WP:HAMMER applies. Handschuh-talk to me 01:57, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
 * From reading the essay on future album titles, I can see it would be inappropriate to title this article Abhinay Deo's [nth] film. In this specific instance, it would seem prudent to use the title as proferred in current GNG reliable sources, it being the best currently searchable term in finding additional reliable sources in relation to the writer, director, and principals. If title actually does change, as was suggested as a possibility in Bollywood Hungama last April, an article can then be moved to the newer title. However, even as recently as December 26, the film is still being called "Crooked" in reliable sources... so it would be best to make it as easily searchable and sourcable as possible.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 16:20, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Comment It seems like a lot of speculation though... Mrmewe (talk) 05:08, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, that is they way the seem to report their news over there... a whole different style from the west... but per WP:Crystal: "It is appropriate to report discussion and arguments about the prospects for success of future proposals and projects or whether some development will occur, if discussion is properly referenced." If the amount of coverage meets WP:GNG it is worth considering for an article.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 08:04, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep Plenty of news coverage.  D r e a m Focus  12:38, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Delete or Incubate Too much speculation to Keep at this time. --DThomsen8 (talk) 02:18, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Ah.... it is exactly that "too much" speculation, as long as there is enough of it and in reliable sources that meet the GNG, that satisfies the caveats in WP:CRYSTAL. Even were the film never to be made, the significant coverage in reliable sources is what allows consideration of an article on the topic. I do appreciate though your allowing consideration of incubation.  Schmidt,  MICHAEL Q. 05:40, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Keep or Incubate. Definitely notable as it is produced by Farhan Akhtar. Geeteshgadkari (talk) 10:26, 10 January 2010 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.